Comments for Text is not Dead http://textisnotdead.com When text is put on a page or other medium, it does not die; it is not static. Readers interact with it, consider it, and respond to it. The text becomes a part of us, if only briefly. It is alive within us and within our culture. Sun, 05 Sep 2010 20:39:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 Comment on The State of Things by sally http://textisnotdead.com/?p=136&cpage=1#comment-96 sally Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:42:57 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=136#comment-96 Kasey, thanks for raising this issue. Some impressive statistics here. But the lead-time numbers, years till widespread adoption, are bogus since widely separated in time, and of course the author has a strong bias towards her industry. I think there's a point of view that says, over and over, WE CAN'T STOP, that we're all going to be slaves to the technological system, but I think it's hooey. The brain is amazingly plastic. It can learn new technologies, love them, and it can unlearn them. We'll learn to distrust our social technologies, I think that's already happening somewhat. Also , I loved Rosenberg's summary on the 'net, thanks for that. Kasey, thanks for raising this issue. Some impressive statistics here. But the lead-time numbers, years till widespread adoption, are bogus since widely separated in time, and of course the author has a strong bias towards her industry.

I think there’s a point of view that says, over and over, WE CAN’T STOP, that we’re all going to be slaves to the technological system, but I think it’s hooey. The brain is amazingly plastic. It can learn new technologies, love them, and it can unlearn them. We’ll learn to distrust our social technologies, I think that’s already happening somewhat.

Also , I loved Rosenberg’s summary on the ‘net, thanks for that.

]]> Comment on Wave of the future? by Henta imiifranic http://textisnotdead.com/?p=68&cpage=1#comment-76 Henta imiifranic Sun, 29 Nov 2009 13:25:29 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=68#comment-76 Much funny! Much funny!

]]> Comment on Wave of the future? by quiconto http://textisnotdead.com/?p=68&cpage=1#comment-69 quiconto Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:18:59 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=68#comment-69 Very interesting article. Very interesting article.

]]> Comment on Meetup by Sally http://textisnotdead.com/?p=93&cpage=1#comment-53 Sally Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:07:28 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=93#comment-53 Hi Kasey - Meetup is an interesting idea. Actually, I think they are still a viable organization, and didn't meet an untimely end. Sally Hi Kasey - Meetup is an interesting idea. Actually, I think they are still a viable organization, and didn’t meet an untimely end.

Sally

]]> Comment on The self-publishing conundrum by sheila http://textisnotdead.com/?p=88&cpage=1#comment-50 sheila Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:38:13 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=88#comment-50 It's way to early to tell where all this is going. I'm very curious. I am especially curious about the fact that anyone can publish anything and who will police it, who will keep the facts straight, and who will decide what is good. But really, those are questions we've been asking about mass media for a least a few decades. Plenty of that is crap. Have you read the Palm Beach Post? Yikes. It's just that there is more user-generated material to filter. But I believe sooner or later, people will stop reading the crap and the good will survive. Oops, did I get kind of Darwinian on this? It’s way to early to tell where all this is going. I’m very curious. I am especially curious about the fact that anyone can publish anything and who will police it, who will keep the facts straight, and who will decide what is good. But really, those are questions we’ve been asking about mass media for a least a few decades. Plenty of that is crap. Have you read the Palm Beach Post? Yikes. It’s just that there is more user-generated material to filter. But I believe sooner or later, people will stop reading the crap and the good will survive. Oops, did I get kind of Darwinian on this?

]]> Comment on The self-publishing conundrum by Jessica http://textisnotdead.com/?p=88&cpage=1#comment-49 Jessica Mon, 02 Nov 2009 02:16:28 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=88#comment-49 I wanted to respond to your statement, "The question remains if the power is available to all, does that dilute its meaning and effect. What makes a self-published work special if anyone can do it?" I think the answer is, it depends on the end to which you are writing. For many people, being able to publish, even if it is only to a dedicated few, is better than no publishing at all. Shirky says, "the written word has no special value in an of itself" for a generation that grew up with the ability to publish, but as someone who works with that generation, I don't believe this is true. I think this should have an asterisk, because again, it depends on what you publish. If you are publishing how you feel today or why you hate Kraft mac & cheese on Facebook, then perhaps the written word doesn't mean a lot. However, those students who have been able to publish their opinions on a book or issue on a class discussion board are often passionate, and often (to my never-ending surprise) refer their parents and friends to our discussion board to show off their writing and arguments. Do these new tools devalue some writing? Probably. But do I think the benefit of giving people a voice outweighs the "heft" that print publishing once gave authors? In the previously stated contexts, yes. I wanted to respond to your statement, “The question remains if the power is available to all, does that dilute its meaning and effect. What makes a self-published work special if anyone can do it?”
I think the answer is, it depends on the end to which you are writing. For many people, being able to publish, even if it is only to a dedicated few, is better than no publishing at all. Shirky says, “the written word has no special value in an of itself” for a generation that grew up with the ability to publish, but as someone who works with that generation, I don’t believe this is true. I think this should have an asterisk, because again, it depends on what you publish.
If you are publishing how you feel today or why you hate Kraft mac & cheese on Facebook, then perhaps the written word doesn’t mean a lot. However, those students who have been able to publish their opinions on a book or issue on a class discussion board are often passionate, and often (to my never-ending surprise) refer their parents and friends to our discussion board to show off their writing and arguments.
Do these new tools devalue some writing? Probably. But do I think the benefit of giving people a voice outweighs the “heft” that print publishing once gave authors? In the previously stated contexts, yes.

]]> Comment on A Flawed System by Jessica http://textisnotdead.com/?p=79&cpage=1#comment-40 Jessica Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:00:34 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=79#comment-40 This is a great entry, right on point. However, I think our Trinity class might show that there are in fact many people (such as ourselves) who value accuracy. Perhaps it isn't that no one cares; perhaps there has been a shift in what we think of as an "expert." Every time I hear about an expert who has been on Oprah, I think of this article (http://www.newsweek.com/id/200025) I read in Newsweek, pointing out that just because Oprah says so, it doesn't make someone an expert. And it's not just Oprah. Wikipedia is an extension of this trend. People assume that because some "troll" took the time to insist that it is a fact, then it is a fact. Why question it? Perhaps it's not that people don't care; perhaps they just don't know enough to question "the experts." This is a great entry, right on point. However, I think our Trinity class might show that there are in fact many people (such as ourselves) who value accuracy. Perhaps it isn’t that no one cares; perhaps there has been a shift in what we think of as an “expert.” Every time I hear about an expert who has been on Oprah, I think of this article (http://www.newsweek.com/id/200025) I read in Newsweek, pointing out that just because Oprah says so, it doesn’t make someone an expert. And it’s not just Oprah.
Wikipedia is an extension of this trend. People assume that because some “troll” took the time to insist that it is a fact, then it is a fact. Why question it? Perhaps it’s not that people don’t care; perhaps they just don’t know enough to question “the experts.”

]]> Comment on What Colbert Has to Say by Jessica http://textisnotdead.com/?p=81&cpage=1#comment-39 Jessica Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:51:24 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=81#comment-39 I just posted this on my blog! I guess I should have checked yours first :) I just posted this on my blog! I guess I should have checked yours first :)

]]> Comment on Advolution by Polprav http://textisnotdead.com/?p=30&cpage=1#comment-21 Polprav Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:52:02 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=30#comment-21 Hello from Russia! Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you? Hello from Russia!
Can I quote a post in your blog with the link to you?

]]> Comment on “Relationship Status” by Jessica http://textisnotdead.com/?p=59&cpage=1#comment-18 Jessica Sat, 03 Oct 2009 18:11:02 +0000 http://textisnotdead.com/?p=59#comment-18 I wonder if Facebook isn't changing the nature of relationships. I find myself using the expression "TMI" more and more, as people share WAY too much information about themselves--especially on Facebook. When there is an electronic record like that, how can we not expect legal implications...especially if it goes beyond divorce lawyers and into the realm of civil rights, with governments using this shared information to compile information on its citizens. I know the police use Facebook and Myspace to gather information--and often this is BEFORE the person is involved in a crime. This reminds me of the movie Minority Report--and while I don't believe weird psychic women will predict crimes in the future, I wonder if the authorities won't still be able to use our personal thoughts and proclivities to predict our behavior in the future? And really, what are your rights if you share that information "publicly" on the WWW? I wonder if Facebook isn’t changing the nature of relationships. I find myself using the expression “TMI” more and more, as people share WAY too much information about themselves–especially on Facebook. When there is an electronic record like that, how can we not expect legal implications…especially if it goes beyond divorce lawyers and into the realm of civil rights, with governments using this shared information to compile information on its citizens.
I know the police use Facebook and Myspace to gather information–and often this is BEFORE the person is involved in a crime. This reminds me of the movie Minority Report–and while I don’t believe weird psychic women will predict crimes in the future, I wonder if the authorities won’t still be able to use our personal thoughts and proclivities to predict our behavior in the future?
And really, what are your rights if you share that information “publicly” on the WWW?

]]>